Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 88

Thread: Sean Casey rumored in 3 way trade discussion

  1. #16
    Member JaxRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    9,482
    Okay, so they tell you to forget the deal then. These are bad contract swaps. You can't get prospects when swapping bad contracts.
    The lowest acceptable payroll amount for ownership to show they are not greedy pigs is 15 million more than they are currently paying. No matter what that currently is.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,782
    I think JaxRed is right -- this deal is a proposed re-allocation of bad contract dollars. No prospects will be included.
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  4. #18
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,137
    Originally posted by JaxRed
    Okay, so they tell you to forget the deal then. These are bad contract swaps. You can't get prospects when swapping bad contracts.
    Agreed. That's why you ask for Tankersley. He's no longer a prospect. Yet he is a AAA pitcher with some intriguing skills.

    I'd do the deal heads-up without a prospect, but it never hurts to ask for a small amount of talent. The Padres and Pirates would be receiving starting players in the deal. The Reds could at least request that somebody throw them a bone.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  5. #19
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,321
    So there's potentially a possible rumor maybe involving the following players:

    Sean Casey
    Jason Kendall
    Kevin Jarvis

    And the guy we'd take is Jarvis? And we'd be happy about it simply because we'd only have to pay him for a season while he stunk? The alternative is to release Jarvis so at least he can negatively impact some other team's performance.

    And we let the best player in the deal- a top 5 catcher- who would cost a couple mil more than an unproductive Casey to go to team #3...

    ...so we can get a player who we'd be best off releasing- thus eating his salary.

    And we're ok with diminishing returns...because we'll get cheaper.

    That's the smokescreen of "Payroll Flexibility" folks. Because if you can't use Casey's dollars to afford a productive Kendall, your team is truly screwed.

    Kendall doesn't have the greatest contract, but if you can't afford it while moving 6.5 M, then you should just hang it up. Ridiculous.

  6. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Findlay OH
    Posts
    1,370
    Originally posted by M2
    The source of the rumor is?

    (I'd do the deal in a hot minute if it was being offered. Jarvis costs $4.25 million in 2004 and had a $500 K buyout of a $5.25 million team option in 2005. The Reds should ask for Dennis Tankersley in addition.)
    Man what did Jarvis ever do to warent this kind of contract???? At least the bad contracts the Reds gave out the players has at least been good players just got worse after signing the contract.

  7. #21
    Member red-in-la's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Santa Paula, CA
    Posts
    6,536
    This from the "he has the job so he must know what is doing crowd." You are sure right, who in the wrong mind would give Kevin Jarvis a BIG LTC? Welcome to the Padres world.

    BTW, it is the same folks who gave Brett Tomko a big contract.
    "Is there a problem officers?"

  8. #22
    Member red-in-la's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Santa Paula, CA
    Posts
    6,536
    Steel, I agree that the Reds are helping the Padres to steal Kendall.....but you do this because you get rid of money AND you open a place to play better (or at least potentially better) players on your team.

    Of course, IFIFIF Casey goes to the Pirates and posts a .900 OPS, then the Reds look stupid.....but Casey couldn't post that when he had Kearns, Dunn, Boone and JR in the line up with him.

    I cannot see how he could improve in the no name line up the Pirates are going to boast.
    "Is there a problem officers?"

  9. #23
    Member JaxRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    9,482
    Whoever gets Kendall is the loser in this deal unless the Pirates pay a big portion of his salary (in which case Pirates are big losers)

    Reds are big winners no matter what.
    The lowest acceptable payroll amount for ownership to show they are not greedy pigs is 15 million more than they are currently paying. No matter what that currently is.

  10. #24
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,581
    I realize that Casey is not the poster child 1B the last two seasons, but I would see this deal with only Jarvis in return akin to giving him away. About the only thing it would provide is a shorter time of a contract not matching production. But the question is, why is it ok to give Casey away when it was a firesale with Boone for Claussen? And there is no heir apparent to play the position. OK, move Dunn, make room for Wily Mo. I don't like that plan to start off the season. Maybe an in season deal, is a better bet to get something in return for Casey. That seems to be the best time to get someone to overpay for your marginal players in today's market, just like the above mentioned Boone for Claussen deal.

  11. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Findlay, Ohio
    Posts
    300
    I agree 100% with traderumor.. I wouldn't even think about the deal. Only way I would is if the money was going to actually be spent on something else of significant use. I for one wouldn't want to see Haynes and Jarvis in the same rotation.

  12. #26
    Pagan/Asatru Ravenlord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Williamsburg, OH and the wilds.
    Posts
    8,992
    personally, i feel for the dollar amounts, Casey is a better value than Jarvis.
    the store for all your blade, costuming (in any regard), leather (also in any regard), and steel craft needs.www.facebook.com/tdhshop


    yes, this really is how we make our living.

  13. #27
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,137
    Kendall annually ranks among the best catchers in baseball. Obviously if he doesn't continue to do that then you've sunk a lot of money into nothing. Yet if he does, you've invested your money in a plus up-the-middle player ... and isn't that the kind of player you want to invest in?

    Basically if Kendall does what he did the previous two season for the next three years, the Padres wouldn't have any reason to complain. The real risk is that he turns 30 next season.

    The Reds only win that deal if they reinvest the money they've saved into something useful. Otherwise it's just a budget cut and, last I looked, they don't award any trophies to the team with the most regressive budget.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  14. #28
    Member red-in-la's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Santa Paula, CA
    Posts
    6,536
    traderumor, here's the difference between the Boone deal and the Casey deal.

    I never was a Boone fan, but the Reds trade him and now, all they can talk about is who do they get to play 3B.

    If you trade Casey today, you have at least TWO very good candidates to replace him. Both Dunn and JR (or even WMP) could be OK defensive 1B's (at least as good as the slow footed Casey) and provide much more 1B-like production.

    Plus, in Casey, you have a 3 year contract at large money to deal with. With Boone, the worst that could be said was that you had to deal with arbitration.
    "Is there a problem officers?"

  15. #29
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,874
    I fall into the camp that believes that the money saved would be reinvested, if not this season, then in the long-term. If this team's raison d'etre is to save money, then they could have saved even more by not hiring a GM, and Allen could have filled both positions. The aim of this team is to compete cheaply. Not as some would have you believe--exist cheaply, cheap as an end in itself. I've said this once before; O'Brien wants to be a GM again when his contract is up in 3 years; he has great incentive to compete. I'm willing to wait and see if he can compete cheaply.
    So, in short, I'd do the deal; Jarvis can pitch out of the bullpen if Valentine isn't ready.

  16. #30
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,137
    I'm not sure it will be reinvested, but you can't reinvest what you don't free up in the first place. That's why I'd do the deal.

    The good news for O'Brien would be that the real savings don't kick in until 2005, so it's not like he'd immediately have to reach into his hat and grab any rabbits.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25